do you believe there's good in everyone?

mariaalice

zeffabelli wrote: »

The Nazis didn't do it by themselves. They had a population desensitised to violence and a culture that felt disenfranchised.

I know the theory, however I wonder if its fully true that as their is no corporal punishment in society and psychical punishment by parent is frowned on by society and will eventually be banned, that somehow we will end up with a society that is so shocked by violence that violence will be virtually eliminated I have my doubts.

I think human nature is flawed ( non religious ) and that we have to learn to be 'good' that's why when people are cruel or deceitful people feel ashamed.

Before we get in to a tautology or how many angles are dancing on the head of pin type argument....I am talking of ashamed of their actions not ashamed of their very existence.

Plus nobody knows what they will do until they are tested.

sbsquarepants

There is of course good and bad in everyone, but so what. Some people commit acts so vile that no amount of good they do subsequently could ever balance the scales. I'm thinking specifically of paedos and rapists and so on.
There are certain lines in the sand that should never be crossed and if they are then you can never go back no matter what.

Eugene Norman

seamus wrote: »

Nah, I disgree. That's just reality. We just stick a facade on it that we call "morality" and pretend that we built the entire structure.

In reality "good" and "evil" are evolutionary processes refining the survival of the species - good deeds are advantageous, bad ones are not.

Still sounds dangerous. I mean the Nazis could have and did justify their morality on grounds of evolutionary processes.

Do bad people exist? Sure. Is it all because bad things happened to them? No.

zeffabelli

mariaalice wrote: »

I know the theory, however I wonder if its fully true that as their is no corporal punishment in society and psychical punishment by parent is frowned on by society and will eventually be banned, that somehow we will end up with a society that is so shocked by violence that violence will be virtually eliminated I have my doubts.

I think human nature is flawed ( non religious ) and that we have to learn to be 'good' that's why when people are cruel or deceitful people feel ashamed.

Before we get in to a tautology or how many angles are dancing on the head of pin type argument....I am talking of ashamed of their actions not ashamed of their very existence.

Plus nobody knows what they will do until they are tested.

Of course there is corporal punishment, it's everywhere, on TV, waterboardjnf, ISIS, game of thrones. The news.

You could even say we are getting our violent urges out by proxy.

Look at how Isis recruits for example.

sbsquarepants

mohawk wrote: »

Psychopaths are drawn to careers where they have power over people. So it makes sense.

Saying someone is a psychopath is a bit of a misnomer. It's a sliding scale, you can be a little bit psychopathic and absolutely harmless or you can be very psychopathic and a serious danger to those around you. It's not a black and white thing. Something like 1 in 100 people are psychopathic to some degree - very few go on to be serial killers!

mariaalice

zeffabelli wrote: »

Of course there is corporal punishment, it's everywhere, on TV, waterboardjnf, ISIS, game of thrones. The news.

You could even say we are getting our violent urges out by proxy.

Look at how Isis recruits for example.

There is no corporal punishment sanctioned by the state which is an important signal about the sort of society we have. The impulse of cruelty is in everyone I think.

Something that I think is interesting if say you looked at issues around bullying,...... parenting, how to stop it etc. will be looked at but what is never discussed is what is the impulse in a 6 year old or a 15year old that takes pleasure in excluding or putting down or hurting another human being.

zeffabelli

mariaalice wrote: »

There is no corporal punishment sanctioned by the state which is an important signal about the sort of society we have. The impulse of cruelty is in everyone I think.

Something that I think is interesting if say you looked at issues around bullying,...... parenting, how to stop it etc. will be looked at but want is never discussed is what is the impulse in a 6 year old or a 15year old that takes pleasure in excluding or putting down or hurting another human being.

There is plenty of violence sanctioned by the state, death penalty, water boarding, police actions, and sanctioned by the culture.

It's like when Hollywood starts complaining about gun control, sorry but Hollywood does more for the promotion of guns than the NRA ever could do.

Isis videos, etc , 911 was shocking, now I barely react to those pictures.

Thing is to get back to your point, we can all point fingers at the nazis but they did not do it alone....there was a climate created after WW1, there was a population desensitised to violence and there were ordinary people who signed up and volunteered.

And look at all the abuse and sadism that happened in this country...saturated with violence both corporal and sexual, everyone knew about it and did nothing.

Cold War Kid

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Good and bad...

They're just societal constructs we invented/developed to make it possible for large groups of us to co-exist in (relative) harmony.

I mean, when a lion kills a buffalo on the serengeti, do we consider it evil or bad in nature? We're not that far removed from other animals on this planet.

Society decides what's good and bad depending on what's practical. Murder is generally bad, because it creates instability and hostility.

Even this site makes arbitrary decisions on what's good and bad... or right and wrong, depending on what's practical for the majority and the majority consensus. They disregard their own rules if the general popular consensus out trumps it.

So yes, everyone has good and bad in them... just cross your fingers that you don't fall on the wrong side of that line when it shifts direction.

Eh, making someone innocent suffer is objectively bad and there's no deciding by "Society" on that one.

Good bit of armchair philosophising on this thread.

Cold War Kid

JustTheOne wrote: »

And if they make a bad decision like murder or something what makes them do that?

You think we have control over our choices when in fact its not true.

It's in our make up and there is nothing to control it.

Just like some people love pizza others hate it.

Or been homosexual or heterosexual, its not a choice its just who we are through our chemical make up.

A sane person is responsible for their choices. Not their feelings, like you say, but their choices.

seamus

Eugene Norman wrote: »

Still sounds dangerous. I mean the Nazis could have and did justify their morality on grounds of evolutionary processes.

That's quite a bit off the mark. If there was any use of the word "evolution" to justify what the Nazis were doing, it was clearly based on a gross misunderstanding of evolution.

Do bad people exist? Sure. Is it all because bad things happened to them? No.

So what you are saying is that some people are just born bad. That no matter what, they will grow up to be Hitler.

Smart Bug

The concept of good and bad stem from moral (religious) considerations. They are entirely subjective and all together too simple to quantify.

There is no good and bad. There only is, or not...

People are people. They have motivations, and from these motivations stem actions. Moral weighting of these actions can only be measured from a non-standard judgemental standpoint. This varies from person, to country, to region, to society, to time period and so on. There are no absolute goods or bads. Therefore the question or posit that 'there is some good in everyone' is asinine at best.

JustTheOne

Cold War Kid wrote: »

A sane person is responsible for their choices. Not their feelings, like you say, but their choices.

Responsible of course but what makes those choices?

People make choices even though they might know its the wrong one.

It's engineered in them to make the choice.

It can't be helped.

Google free will is an illusion.

It explains it better than I can.

mariaalice

Smart Bug wrote: »

The concept of good and bad stem from moral (religious) considerations. They are entirely subjective and all together too simple to quantify.

There is no good and bad. There only is, or not...

People are people. They have motivations, and from these motivations stem actions. Moral weighting of these actions can only be measured from a non-standard judgemental standpoint. This varies from person, to country, to region, to society, to time period and so on. There are no absolute goods or bads. Therefore the question or posit that 'there is some good in everyone' is asinine at best.

I think murder except by the state( capital punishment ) or in a war is a universal taboo.

ThinkProgress

Cold War Kid wrote: »

Eh, making someone innocent suffer is objectively bad and there's no deciding by "Society" on that one.

Good bit of armchair philosophising on this thread.

So is the lion objectively bad for eating the innocent buffalo, who was just eating the innocent grass?

We created bad and good. And our definition of both can change quite dramatically at times! Armchair philosophy is the best kind... "do it to him before he does it to you!"

Cold War Kid

So beating a child to death is not objectively bad - "Society" decided it is. How deep.

ThinkProgress

Cold War Kid wrote: »

So beating a child to death is not objectively bad - "Society" decided it is. How deep.

A child is a miniature human. Hitler was once a cute little child... :P

You never answered my question, is the lion objectively bad/evil?

Son Of A Vidic

Robsweezie wrote: »

do you believe there's good in everyone?

In a minority of people? No. But in the majority of people? Yes

zeffabelli

mariaalice wrote: »

I think murder except by the state( capital punishment ) or in a war is a universal taboo.

Incest is the only universal taboo and even that's changing.

Good people can have bad traits and do bad things, but still be fundamentally good. Bad people can do good things and have some good traits, but still be fundamentally bad.

There's good and bad in everyone, it's a spectrum. I'd say there are few to no people who exist at each extreme. Is there really anyone who's 100% good or 100% bad? I doubt it.

VisibleGorilla

Yes, 100%.

No one is born bad, even people who do bad can come good.

Cuban Pete

Cold War Kid wrote: »

So beating a child to death is not objectively bad - "Society" decided it is. How deep.

Well yes, obviously. Morality is a necessary consequence for societies to exist, nothing more. If people can't agree to live under an accepted set of rules then there's no society.

Beating a child to death is not "objectively" bad because there is no "objective" set of morals that is "right". And if anyone would like to claim there is some objective set of morals then I'd ask, from where did it come?

Oh and before anyone thinks to suggest I condone beating children, I don't.

Eugene Norman

seamus wrote: »

That's quite a bit off the mark. If there was any use of the word "evolution" to justify what the Nazis were doing, it was clearly based on a gross misunderstanding of evolution.

So what if the Nazis were wrong, they still used evolution to justify their actions? The poster(s) I was responding to said morality was a social construct and/or merely a product of evolutionary pressures. The Nazis said evolution worked at the level of race and non-racial morality was an invalid social construct. Both views are dangerous.

So what you are saying is that some people are just born bad. That no matter what, they will grow up to be Hitler.

The latter is a stretch. The former -- that psychopaths are born not made is generally accepted. However a psychopath doesn't necessarily end up killing people, and people who aren't born psychopaths can do bad things.

Mother Brain

Cold War Kid wrote: »

Eh, making someone innocent suffer is objectively bad and there's no deciding by "Society" on that one.

Good bit of armchair philosophising on this thread.

In fairness that's totally true. I mean I believe this stuff on an intellectual level alright, but it doesn't change the way I would actually feel or act in real life. Needless suffering still feels bad to me. Regardless of my high and mighty conceptual abstractions!

wakka12

Its hard to say, because people can do 'good' things but not out of the goodness of their hearts but because they know they'll be recognised as heroes etc and may benefit socially from the act. So does it make them a good person or just selfish? You can't say, good and bad are societal constructs any who.

wil

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Treat people like blackberries growing along a quiet country loning.

Take them as you find them, but be careful of the green and over ripe ones.

He who enjoys wild blackberries eventually get stung by wasps.

Natures drunken little psychos.

c_man

do you believe there's good in everyone?

Yup. And I'd rather believe that and for it occasionally to not be the case, rather than go through life being cynical and automatically assuming that strangers are out to do* me.


*hot chicks excepted of course

TheLastMohican

Everyone is good for something even the ones that are good for fuck all.

Deep baby, deep!

Jogathon

We all know families where most siblings are normal, but there is one who is trouble. Same upbringing, same parenting, yet does not function the same as the others. And generally that difference was seen at a very young age, as a toddler they were wild, as children they were badly behaved in school etc.

I think no one is fully bad, but I think that some are pre disposed to being more bad than others. Nature or nurture, all cannot be explained away by nurture.

sbsquarepants

JustTheOne wrote: »

Responsible of course but what makes those choices?

People make choices even though they might know its the wrong one.

It's engineered in them to make the choice.

It can't be helped.

Google free will is an illusion.

It explains it better than I can.

The whole free will illusion thing fascinates me. I'm still not sure what side of the argument I come down on - I tend to flip flop on it!:D I have trouble seeing how it could exist without some supernatural or magical element (like god for example) which I'm not too happy to accept, but I also have trouble with accepting I have absolutely no say in anything I do when I "feel" so strongly that I have.

But... if you ever read anything about behavioural psychology you'll no doubt be aware that generally speaking behaviour precedes reason - i.e. we tend to act first, then basically invent the "reason" why we acted that way. It's born out by study after study.
People aren't lying they genuinely believe this is the reason why I've done "x" but it's all false - there are experiments where the choice the subject made is switched with out them knowing yet they still explain why they made a choice they didn't even make - again they aren't lying, it's just that in reality the reason comes after the choice. The things we do are largely (maybe even entirely) beyond our conscious control, we just don't like to admit it.

demanufactured

Nope.
Some "people" are a waste of oxygen and space.

JustTheOne

sbsquarepants wrote: »

The whole free will illusion thing fascinates me. I'm still not sure what side of the argument I come down on - I tend to flip flop on it!:D I have trouble seeing how it could exist without some supernatural or magical element (like god for example) which I'm not too happy to accept, but I also have trouble with accepting I have absolutely no say in anything I do when I "feel" so strongly that I have.

But... if you ever read anything about behavioural psychology you'll no doubt be aware that generally speaking behaviour precedes reason - i.e. we tend to act first, then basically invent the "reason" why we acted that way. It's born out by study after study.
People aren't lying they genuinely believe this is the reason why I've done "x" but it's all false - there are experiments where the choice the subject made is switched with out them knowing yet they still explain why they made a choice they didn't even make - again they aren't lying, it's just that in reality the reason comes after the choice. The things we do are largely (maybe even entirely) beyond our conscious control, we just don't like to admit it.

Kind of what I'm on about but not really the God side of things.

Basically any choice you make you were always gonna make it.

You didn't actually have a choice. It was always gonna happen that way no matter what.

I agree on the way people's chemical make up decides who they are and what they are.

Like the example of the black sheep of the good family.

So when someone is been a dick they probably can't help it, its just the way they are.

Whitewinged

sbsquarepants wrote: »

The whole free will illusion thing fascinates me. I'm still not sure what side of the argument I come down on - I tend to flip flop on it!:D I have trouble seeing how it could exist without some supernatural or magical element (like god for example) which I'm not too happy to accept, but I also have trouble with accepting I have absolutely no say in anything I do when I "feel" so strongly that I have.

But... if you ever read anything about behavioural psychology you'll no doubt be aware that generally speaking behaviour precedes reason - i.e. we tend to act first, then basically invent the "reason" why we acted that way. It's born out by study after study.
People aren't lying they genuinely believe this is the reason why I've done "x" but it's all false - there are experiments where the choice the subject made is switched with out them knowing yet they still explain why they made a choice they didn't even make - again they aren't lying, it's just that in reality the reason comes after the choice. The things we do are largely (maybe even entirely) beyond our conscious control, we just don't like to admit it.

Yea when you look back at certain choices you made you realise you didnt have that much control over your reactions.

luckily my reactions and instinctual choices have always been good ....or am i just connvincing myself of that

JustTheOne

Whitewinged wrote: »

Yea when you look back at certain choices you made you realise you didnt have that much control over your reactions.

luckily my reactions and instinctual choices have always been good ....or am i just connvincing myself of that

Mad when you think about murderers etc

Are they really to blame or is their minds to blame?

Thoughts they can't control.

Whitewinged

JustTheOne wrote: »

Mad when you think about murderers etc

Are they really to blame or is their minds to blame?

Thoughts they can't control.

I think its a mixture of things. Choice, control, recognising emotions at the time,being able to forsee outcome and reason etc.

Sometimes other urges outweigh these things for some people and sometimes only in certain situations.

Rubberchikken

no. i don't believe there's good in everyone. bullies, pervs, burglars, murderers etc. where's the good in them?

Sunnyisland

I like to this some good in everyone and do try and find it when interacting with people, but it's sometimes very hard .

sbsquarepants

JustTheOne wrote: »

Kind of what I'm on about but not really the God side of things.

.

Doesn't necessarily have to be god, but something out of the ordinary. If you accept a deterministic universe where effect can only ever follow cause - then there is no room for free will. Everything is by definition predetermined. If you accept free will then you must accept that somewhere along the line the relationship between cause and effect is broken, you are able to do something entirely of your own volition that has no cause, you have somehow stepped outside the normal framework and are the originator of an entirely uncaused action. I have trouble believing either - yet one of them must be the case.

Optimalprimerib

fermanagh_man wrote: »

There isn't good in everyone.
Take Paedophiles + rapists for example

They might be good at it though

sbsquarepants

Optimalprimerib wrote: »

They might be good at it though

Depends how you define good.
Mohammed was a paedophile and a rapist - plenty of people think he was a good man. Perfect in fact.
Funny old world innit:D

Whitewinged

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Doesn't necessarily have to be god, but something out of the ordinary. If you accept a deterministic universe where effect can only ever follow cause - then there is no room for free will. Everything is by definition predetermined. If you accept free will then you must accept that somewhere along the line the relationship between cause and effect is broken, you are able to do something entirely of your own volition that has no cause, you have somehow stepped outside the normal framework and are the originator of an entirely uncaused action. I have trouble believing either - yet one of them must be the case.

Kind of like the butterfly effect

also you are destined to react to certain events based on your history (which was also destined) and biology

philstar

"there is good and bad in everyone"